updated
Stated Mr. Carry Cavanaugh, American co-chair of the OSCE Minsk Group, on answering to the question how the sides are close to signing a peace agreement.
On April 17, Mr. Cavanaugh stated in his speech at the Institute of Central Asia and Caucasus in Washington that "Even the both presidents do not know it. Because it depends not only on the presidents, but on the people of the region and international community". Touching on the perspectives of regulation he pointed out that the presidents have themselves confirmed "now they are closer to peace".
"I can say that the presidents have dealt with complicated moments. In addition, several complicated moments still remain. But they have good idea on solving them. The international community, in its turn, thinks that they can help them in this work", stressed Mr. Cavanaugh. In his opinion, the presidents have good chance because they approach "seriously" to the settlement of the problem. At the same time, he thinks that all of these do not mean signing of a peace agreement.
"The most complicated question is how the presidents will accept compromises and present it to the people. How will you convince the people that passed the war to a just peace and the necessity of accepting these concessions" said Mr. Cavanaugh. The international community may support the leaders in this question. But the diplomat confirmed that it is very complicated question and seems how difficult this question is in accordance with the situation in other conflicting regions of the world. However, he thinks "the presidents should explain their nations that only such a way can bring peace to the region". He added that the decision about the peace should be adopted not by the international community, but by the presidents themselves. "We can work with the leaders of these countries in order to approach to peace. But we can not guarantee that there will be gained a peace", stressed the American diplomat. At the end, Mr. Cavanaugh said: "After the Florida talks there is such an impression that there is a potential for gaining a peace this year".
AZERBAIJAN BULLETIN N:16(270), APRIL 19 2001 [ENGLISH]
Karabakh Peace Efforts Face Tough Public Jury
BAKU, Apr 19, 2001 -- (Reuters) With an embittered public on each side,
politicians trying to end a 13-year conflict between Azerbaijan and
Armenia over Nagorno-Karabakh have little room for maneuver, Azerbaijan's
foreign minister said on Thursday.
The new U.S. administration has tried to breathe fresh life into the
flagging peace process and Secretary of State Colin Powell hosted a summit
this month between the Azeri and Armenian leaders in the Florida resort of
Key West.
But with moods unchanged at home, success may prove elusive.
"The conflict should not be solved by two presidents, it should be solved
by two nations," Azeri Foreign Minister Vilayat Guliyev told Reuters in an
interview.
"The idea of compromise is unpopular in both countries -- nobody wants to
make compromises. Unfortunately, there isn't the psychological will for a
peaceful resolution of the conflict."
War broke out in the rugged mountains of Nagorno-Karabakh in the dying
years of the Soviet Union, when its mainly ethnic Armenian population
tried to break away from Azeri control.
Some 35,000 people were killed and 800,000 fled their homes before Azeri
forces were driven out and a truce called in 1994.
Little progress has been made towards a comprehensive peace deal. Three
proposals have already fallen by the wayside.
U.S., French and Russian mediators are now drawing up a fourth package
after a week of closed-door talks in Key West.
GUESSING GAME
Both sides have kept a vow of silence on the talks, but have been more
vocal about what was not up for discussion.
Guliyev said a territorial exchange was not on the agenda. The American
mediator, Special Ambassador Carey Cavanaugh, said the idea of a "common
state" -- unprecedented in international law -- had been abandoned.
Armenian President Robert Kocharyan said Nagorno-Karabakh could not exist
as an enclave without a corridor to Armenia.
Guliyev said the "Lachin corridor" linking Armenia to Nagorno-Karabakh
would have to be matched by a corridor to the Azeri province of
Nakhichevan, which is sandwiched between Armenia, Turkey and Iran.
The foreign minister said Azerbaijan would allow Nagorno-Karabakh a "high
degree of autonomy" but only within the Azeri state. Some Azeri opposition
leaders balk even at this.
They say ailing president Haydar Aliyev is prepared to capitulate to earn
himself the legacy of peacemaker -- and ensure power is handed down to his
son Ilham.
"President Aliyev wants to make great compromises for a solution to
Karabakh," Ali Kerimov, leader of the Popular Front, told Reuters.
"What does high autonomy mean? Why should the Armenians be more special
than any other ethnic group? In Azerbaijan, there is no one but Haydar
Aliyev who wants to make such compromises."
BITTER MEMORIES
Many Azeris seem to agree they are victims of aggression and should not be
asked to offer the Armenians anything.
Armenian forces not only control Nagorno-Karabakh, but also a large buffer
of Azeri territory surrounding it. Hundreds of thousands of Azeri refugees
are still sheltering in railway carriages, basements and hostels in and
around the capital Baku.
"We didn't start the war, but we were the ones that suffered," said Rafig,
34, a security guard. "Now we are treated like two children in a fight,
like we were both naughty."
International mediators, working within the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe, hope to present the new peace proposal at a new
round of talks in Geneva in June.
U.S. envoy Cavanaugh said winning public opinion was the biggest hurdle to
a deal which Washington hopes will allow a pipeline to carry oil from the
Caspian Sea to the Mediterranean.
"The most difficult issue is convincing the populations of both countries
on the merits of making significant compromises to achieve peace,"
Cavanaugh said by telephone from Washington.
"The populations are not as far along as the presidents, and it will
certainly be a daunting task."
(C)2001 Copyright Reuters Limited
AZERI POSITIONS SHELLED AGAIN
Source:Turan News Agency
18.04.01--TOVUZ--The units of the Armenian Army shelled the positions of
Azerbaijans National Army near the Agdam village of western Tovuz region
which abuts on Armenia from 2:40 to 4:30 p.m. on April 17. The shelling
was conducted from sub-machine guns from the Joratan village of Armenias
Berd region. The Azeri army opened return fire. No human casualties are
reported. This was announced by the Defense Ministrys press service.
By Staff Writers
[ANS] News Digest, April 19, 2001
Azeri minister rules out cultural exchanges with Armenia
SOURCE: MPA news agency, Baku, in Russian 0825 gmt 17 Apr 01
Baku, 17 April: "Resumption of cultural exchanges between Azerbaijan and
Armenia will be possible only after the political settlement of the
conflict between these states," Azerbaijani Culture Minister Polad
Bul-Buloglu said in Moscow on 16 April. He said that "cultures of our
peoples are alike, we are neighbours and therefore cultural exchanges
might resume. However, contacts will begin after the resolution of
political and territorial problems".
#########################################################################
HL NOTE: The following news articles ignore such basic facts that:
1) Karabakh region of Azerbaijan was, is, and will remain to be a
legitimate part of the Azerbaijan Republic;
2) Karabakh, and seven other regions are illegally occupied by
the Republic of Armenia, the aggressor;
3) That the puppet leaders and regime(s) of some self-proclaimed "NKR"
entity are recognized by no state and lack any legitimacy whatsoever.
#########################################################################
Armenian paper urges Diaspora to back Karabakh resettlement programme
SOURCE: Azg, Yerevan, in Armenian 18 Apr 01 p2
Text of report by Armenian newspaper Azg on 18 April entitled "The
Nagornyy Karabakh Republic really is a state" by Tatul Akopyan
subhead It is the only Caucasus republic where population growth is
registered
It is noticeable that the standard of living conditions is higher in
Karabakh than in Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia, prices of essential and
consumer commodities are lower, taxes are lower, there is almost no
emigration, and unemployment is the same as in Armenia, Azerbaijan or
Georgia. Martial law is in force in the NKR Nagornyy Karabakh Republic ,
but this does not prevent the NKR government from establishing democracy
in the country. Some experts say that the NKR, which is not recognized by
anybody, is a freer and more democratic country than Council of Europe
member Azerbaijan.
The NKR's only problem, which can certainly be called a pan-national one,
is the problem of resettlement, which is the main guarantee for NKR
security. According to unofficial information from Stepanakert, the NKR
has 150,000-160,000 thousand residents, while the republic is able to
provide normal living conditions for more than 300,000 people. The NKR
prime minister, A. Anushavan Danielyan, said several times that in 2000
the NKR population would reach 300,000. But today it is evident that the
NKR state budget does not have the necessary means to expand this
programme and accelerate its rate.
Artsakh Karabakh can currently accept 100 people: about 20 families, as
the natural, climatic and soil conditions allow. However, 200-250 families
are returning to Karabakh and resettling there every year. If we take into
account that 5,000-6,000 US dollars are necessary for the construction of
a new house, 120m dollars are needed for the construction of 20,000 houses
- an inaccessible sum for a nation with a 5m-strong Diaspora. As Samvel
Arutyunyan, head of the internal migration and resettlement board, told
Azg, since October 2000 till today 2,000 families have wanted to resettle
in Artsakh. Five hundred families were registered and work on their move
has already started. Armenian families from Armenia, the Russian
Federation's North Caucasus republics, Rostov, Krasnodar regions and other
countries want to move to Karabakh.
As the NKR government is unable to accept all the applicants at the same
time, selection is made according to the following criteria: a) the
families must be whole, b) the families must have many children, c) they
must have experience in agriculture, raising livestock and so on. The NKR
government gives some aid and privileges to the immigrants. The
resettlement of these families in Artsakh is carried out with state funds
- they receive a newly built house, 6,000 square metres of land per
capita, a credit of 200,000 drams for 20 years and 0.5 per cent interest
per family, and families are exempted from taxes for the first five years.
We hope that the Armenians of the Diaspora will support the programme of
Artsakh's resettlement. It is difficult to imagine Armenia's future
without a free, independent and prosperous Artsakh.
BBC Monitoring Trans Caucasus Unit
Supplied by BBC Worldwide Monitoring
April 18, 2001, Wednesday
SECTION 907 IS THE RESULT OF ARMENIAN DISPORAS ACTIVITIES: SENATOR SHELBY
Source:ANS
16.04.01--BAKU--Senator Richard Shelby, the head of the U.S. Congresss
intelligence committee announced during his meeting with the President of
Azerbaijan, Heydar Aliyev that exactly Azerbaijan plays the biggest role
in preservation of stability in the South Caucasus. This is why the new
U.S. Administration is going to broaden its relations with Azerbaijan, Mr
Shelby said. But the senator also said the main obstacle was the notorious
Section 907 to the Freedom Support Act. Said the U.S. guest: I think its
time to repeal Section 907. It makes no sense. Its the result of the
Armenian Diaspora. One could bring an argument that the section is an
obstacle on the way to Karabakh adjustment. Of course, if a state occupies
another�s territory, there cant be good relations between them. It became
clear from the senators speech that the new U.S. Administration was
worried with Azerbaijans recent inclination towards Russia. Mr Shelby
pointed out that the U.S. supports the Baku-Ceyhan Main Export Pipeline
saying his country doesn�t want Azeri oil be transported to Russia. Said Mr
Shelby: I guess everyone understands that if the Main Export Pipeline runs
through Russia, Azerbaijan will give its destiny in Russians hands. But
the people of Azerbaijan is historically well aware of being dependent on
Russia. President Aliyev agreed with the senator. The first and foremost
problem was to solve the Karabakh conflict and repeal Section 907 for
realization of regional oil and gas projects. Said the head of Azerbaijan:
This is why, one should put an end to injustice in the just organization
like the U.S. Congress. I think the Baku-Ceyhan pipeline is real. We
already have real programs on this account. The Azeri president emphasized
that Baku and Washington should closely cooperate for ensuring the safety
of the Baku-Ceyhan oil pipeline.
By Etibar Mamedov
AZERI PRESIDENT SATISFIED WITH
KEY WEST TALKS
Source:ANS
16.04.01--BAKU--The Key West talks were successful for Azerbaijan. This
was announced by the President of Azerbaijan, Heydar Aliyev upon his
return from the United States early on April 15 the head of the Azeri
state said although no concrete agreements were reached between him and
his Armenian counterpart Robert Kocharian, he however rated the fact of
holding the meeting as a positive event. It should be noted that the Azeri
leader had severely criticized the OSCE Minsk Group co-chairs in the
opening of Key West talks. Said Mr Aliyev: The co-chairs have felt I was
going to put a severe criticism on them, because it wasnt the first time.
They kept sending me messages that criticism wasnt needed. But I just told
the truth. Its the matter of future whether they will draw some
conclusions or not. Azerbaijan hasnt gone farther than the concessions
promised earlier. The Azeri president said the concession limits of the
official Baku were made public in the statement issued during the Key West
talks. We would remind you that the head of the Azeri state demanded in
his statement withdrawal of Armenias occupant forces from Azeri lands and
return of one million Azeri refugees to their homes. Its noteworthy that
the Minsk Group co-chairs had announced that work was being conducted
towards participation in the talks of Karabakhs Armenian community. Said
also the Azeri president: No proposals were made. No talks had been
conducted before on participation of Karabakhs Armenian community in the
adjustment process. There wasnt even a proposal concerning this. The
president also said the second positive side of the talks was the fact
that the Karabakh conflict was once again reminded to worlds powers. The
Azeri leader also noted that it was important because the Armenian
Diaspora was powerful. If the U.S. Department of State and U.S. newspaper
portray Armenia as the aggressor, its in favor of Azerbaijan, Mr Aliyev
concluded.
By Etibar Mamedov
[ANS] News Digest, April 16, 2001
Nagorno Karabakh: No Signature in Geneva, Says Aliyev
BAKU, Apr 15, 2001 -- (Agence France Presse) Azerbaijan's President Heydar
Aliyev said Saturday he did not believe a document would be signed during
a new round of negotiations with Armenia on Nagorno Karabakh in Geneva in
June.
Armenian President Robert Kocharian had said in Yerevan on Thursday that
an accord on the Armenian-majority separatist enclave in Azeri territory
might be signed by the two countries during the coming meeting of their
presidents.
"Robert Kocharian's declarations cannot affect the course of the
negotiations," Aliyev said at Baku airport on his return from a trip
during which he met the Armenian president in Key West, Florida.
Aliyev said he was "satisfied" with his discussions in Key West and was
pleased that representatives of the Organization for Security and
Cooperation in Europe's Minsk Group on Nagorno Karabakh led by the United
States, Russia and France also took part.
According to delegates, the parties went some way to resolving the
13-year-long conflict during the talks, which were held from April 3 to 6.
Kocharian and Aliyev also held separate talks with U.S. President George
W. Bush on Monday.
Nagorno Karabakh is an Armenian-majority enclave in southwestern
Azerbaijan.
The territory's local assembly voted in 1988 to be administered by
Yerevan, a move which sparked a full-scale war with the breakup of the
Soviet Union.
The Karabakh Armenians, with support from Yerevan, drove the Azeris from
the territory and occupied a large patch of land outside.
A ceasefire was signed in 1994, but the talks have dragged on ever since.
More than 30,000 people were killed from both sides and some one million
driven from their homes during the course of the dispute.
Copyright 2001 Agence France Presse
Peace for the Caucasus
Source: The Miami Herald (4 April 2001)
by BRENDA SHAFFER
At the invitation of Secretary of State Colin Powell, President Heidar
Aliyev of Azerbaijan and President Robert Kocharian of Armenia are holding
a summit in Key West. They hope to resolve the Nagorno-Karabagh conflict
that has persisted since the late 1980s.
Current conditions suggest that resolution of this conflict is attainable.
Azerbaijan and Armenia have been in conflict over control of the
Nagorno-Karabakh province since the eve of the fall of the Soviet Union.
Nagorno-Karabakh is populated predominately by ethnic Armenians but is
within Azerbaijan's borders. The Azerbaijan-Armenia war waged over this
territory has created many refugees (about one million Azerbaijanis and
300,000 Armenians). Since the 1994 cease-fire, the Nagorno-Karabakh
province has been de facto autonomous.
What can the United States do to ensure that this historic opportunity for
resolving the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict materializes?
It should refrain from attempting to implement a Pax Americana peace for
the Caucasus. Instead, it should ensure that this peace process and
agreement is carried out in full partnership with Russia. There is a big
difference between relative power and relevant power.
The United States is indeed the global hegemon, but Russia is still a big
weight in the Caucasus. For peace to succeed, Russia must feel that it has
a stake in it. In the early 1990s, Russia exacerbated tensions between the
sides to keep each vulnerable to its dictates. Under President Vladimir
Putin, however, Russia seems more interested in ending the conflict.
The United States should encourage this through partnership with Russia in
the peace process, but it also should stand up for the sovereignty of the
Caucasus's states.
It should recognize that this conflict is not about ``ancient hatreds'' or
religious and cultural divides, but about conflict of interests between
regional factors and external powers, as well as a simple struggle over
land. By stressing the religious and other differences between the
combatants, the United States may miss focusing on the actual causes of the
conflict, which are much more mundane.
It should work toward a settlement based on opening the region and
relaxing the borders -- not creating new ones -- among the three states in
the south Caucasus: Armenia, Azerbaijan and Georgia.
It should encourage direct trade among bordering provinces, even if
state-to-state trade and cooperation has not been formally established.
Direct trade would be useful in the border areas between Armenia and
Turkey; Nagorno-Karabakh and Baku; and Azerbaijan and Armenia (in the
territory of Georgia).
It should face reality. Armenia has maintained that it is not a side to
the conflict, but rather that the war is between Baku and the ethnic
Armenians in Nagorno-Karabakh. Also, Azerbaijan has refused participation
of Nagorno-Karabakh's local authorities in the formal negotiations. Both
fictions must be dropped.
Armenia is a full side to the conflict, and the Nagorno-Karabakh
authorities should participate in the formal negotiation process.
It should help the sides realize that the current status quo (no war, no
peace) is not an option. Must the refugees be punished because they have
not chosen the path of violence to force an international spotlight on
their desperate situation?
Also, since independence, a significant portion of Armenia's population
has emigrated due to the country's inability to develop under the current
conditions.
It's time for the two sides and outside powers meeting in Key West to
solve the Nagorno-Karabakh conflict, change the status quo in the Caucasus
and prevent the renewal of violent hostilities.
Brenda Shaffer is research director at Harvard University's Caspian
Studies Program.
Published Wednesday, April 4, 2001
� 2001 The Miami Herald and wire service sources. All Rights Reserved.
http://www.miami.com/herald
Azeri analyst muses on possible achievements,
failures of Key West talks
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 14, 2001
[Subhead] There are results and there are not
Mubariz Ahmadoglu, head of the Centre for Political Technology and
Innovations
The Key West talks are over. The new US administration has for the first
time paid serious attention to the Nagornyy Karabakh conflict. For the first
time both the mediators and experts from the countries in the conflict have
been involved in the settlement. For the first time the mediators have
appealed to Iran as a regional country to help in the resolution of this
conflict. For the first time Heydar Aliyev made such a harsh statement at
such a meeting. For the first time the mediators have said that serious
results have been achieved in the talks. For the first time a high ranking
diplomat represented Russia. We should note that conflicting assessments of
these talks, which were very difficult and complex, are natural. So, have
these talks given any results? The answer is as simple as the question
itself: yes and no. These are some of the results:
First, the mediators, especially Russia and the USA, have realized that
leaving this conflict unresolved is not in their interests. The money coming
from the Caspian region, particularly Azerbaijan, should be divided. Russia
needs a source of income in addition to its own oil to solve its social and
economic problems. The income generated by Western capital in the CIS,
particularly in Azerbaijan, could be such a source for Russia. We should
note that Russia has limited possibilities to create such sources of income
by itself. The West needs to earn money in a stable way. The West can give
Russia a source of income, while Russia ensures stability for the West. At
least Russia will remain calm. This could be seen as the greatest success of
the Aliyev government. The great powers will reject the "stick" aspect of
their favorite "carrot and stick" policy and use only the "carrot".
Second, tensions could arise when sharing the dividends from the resolution
of the conflict between the USA and Russia. We are talking about political
tension here. The "spy war" created a Cold War atmosphere on the eve of this
meeting. Competition of this kind is favourable for Azerbaijan in the
settlement of the conflict.
And third, the appearance of differences between the initial outlines of the
settlement models by the USA and Russia is another result. According to my
observations, the US model is based on the following formula: concessions to
Azerbaijan in communications and to the Armenians in Karabakh's status,
i.e.. communication between Azerbaijan and Naxcivan should be established
and the security of this communication ensured. The USA is presenting this
as a big achievement for Azerbaijan and demands of Azerbaijan to agree to
something slightly less than "common state" status [for Karabakh].
Incidentally, we should note that communication with Naxcivan is a great
achievement for us and a great loss for Armenia. However, this communication
has greater importance for the USA than Azerbaijan. The West acquires
alternative access to the South Caucasus and Georgia is relieved of Russia's
pressure as a result of these communications. The only reason for pressure
on Georgia is its role as the West's gateway to the region. The West should
create such a gateway in Azerbaijan and will do this sooner or later.
Russia's model is as follows: Naxcivan's links with Azerbaijan remain as
they are. Nagornyy Karabakh is given a status similar to Naxcivan's. Another
agreement could be signed for this. I repeat that these are my observations.
Those involved in the Karabakh settlement no longer see any problem
concerning Azerbaijan's territorial integrity and the return of refugees.
They believe that these issues will be solved soon. This is the fourth
result.
At the same time, there have been no results, because:
First, no document has been signed.
Second, at such meetings the sides usually issue statements, but this time t
hey did not do this.
And finally, the presidents did not meet officially and Armenian President
Robert Kocharyan spoke as a "touchy child".
US President George Bush's meeting with the president should not be
construed as an achievement in the talks. On the eve of his departure Heydar
Aliyev said that he would visit Washington and meet the US administration
members. This was his wish. Aliyev appealed to Bush for a meeting. How could
Bush reject his request? This is a kind of process where Aliyev depends on
Bush and Bush depends on Aliyev. Bush met Kocharyan along with Aliyev to
strike a balance between the sides. Iran's role should also be blamed for
the failure of the talks. Anyone, for instance Iran, could violate a fragile
agreement. Thus, Iran should not be ignored. This idea comes from the new
French cochairman.
[Passage omitted: this is the beginning of a new stage in settlement; there
will be lively economic cooperation in the region]
I found Aliyev to be fed up at this meeting. Aliyev, who is a patient
person, is fed up with the Armenians not realizing current realities, the
double standards of the mediators and the biased and apathetic position of
the great powers. I think that Aliyev is now in a bellicose mood.
The Armenians' reference to the results of the war, not international law,
can only exacerbate the martial mood of a bellicose person. In addition, it
is possible to enjoy other benefits of the war. We trust in the strength of
the Azerbaijani army. I can also observe that the Armenian army is
weakening. The Armenians are afraid of a war. Aliyev knows all this. Simply,
there are certain issues related to time, conditions and places which should
be discussed.
Source: 525 qazet, Baku, in Azeri 11 Apr 01 p3
Azerbaijan : DOUBLE IMPRESSION ABOUT KEY WEST TALKS
By Farhad Mammadov
On April 3-7, the talks held at Key West City of Florida
continue to remain main topic of discussion in the country. The
Azerbaijani community only knows that moderators stated the
conflicting parties have agreed with "serious compromises". Taking
into consideration of these compromises co-chairs should prepare
suggestions on the final variant of settlement of the conflict
until the next talks planned to be held in Geneva in June 2001.
The principle of confidentiality in the talks has caused appearing
of several versions. According to one of the main versions,
Armenian president Robert Kocharian has agreed with the variant of
"exchange of passage" at Key West talks. This variant considers
opening by Armenia a transport passage from Mehri region in the
borders of Iran to Nakhchivan province of Azerbaijan. And instead
of this Nagorno Karabakh is taken from enclave situation by giving
a passage from Lachin region of Azerbaijan. But the status planned
to be given to Nagorno Karabakh may be "close to independence" in
accordance with those versions.
Azerbaijani community appreciates the activation of the U.S.
diplomacy at Key West talks. Because, the U.S. have increased the
efficiency of talks by organizing them in a new format. In
addition, as the U.S. is considered a strategic partner of
Azerbaijan, they hope that there has not been given suggestions
unnatural to the Azerbaijan's interests at Key West talks.
Nevertheless, the Azerbaijani opposition is concerned that the
president Aliev will agree with the settlement of the conflict by
compromises being against the interests of the country during his
power. Opposition leaders have begun demanding to reveal the
essence of compromises after the contradictory versions appeared
about the results of Key West talks. One of the interesting facts
is that thus co-chairs have stated on the successfulness of the
talks, the conflicting parties have begun "demonstrating their
forces".
On April 3, when Key West talks have begun, the Armenian army
held large-scale military trainings near the borders with
Nakhchivan province of Azerbaijan. It is notable that Armenian
policy-makers were stating on the eve of talks that they would
unify Nakhchivan with Armenia. And two days later after the
military trainings of Armenian army (on April 10), the Azerbaijani
army has begun military trainings near the territories occupied by
Armenians. Some of the retired military specialists were enlisted
to these trainings is stated. The defense minister personally
heads the trainings of Azerbaijani army.
At this time, the armed units of Nagorno Karabakh Armenians
have begun military trainings, as well, and chief of the Armenian
Army's Headquarter heads them. Though the parties state that the
military trainings "have been previously planned", but observers
consider Armenia's military trainings just on the day of Key West
talks as an effort of influence on Azerbaijan. But the Azerbaijani
side wants to demonstrate its ability to liberate the occupied
lands by force with increasing military activation. Heidar Aliev
is still in the U.S. and is undergoing a medical examination in
Cleveland clinics. It is not exactly known when he will return
back to Baku.
STINA news agency
The Network of Independent Journalists
for Central and Eastern Europe - Weekly service
Issue No. 219 - April 17, 2001.
Azeri president's son says Baku ready to consider
Tatarstan model for Karabakh
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 14, 2001
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency MPA
Baku, 13 April: "The talks in Key West were confidential in character, but I
do not believe that Azerbaijan could have made unilateral concessions," the
first vice-president of the State Oil Company of the Azerbaijani Republic
[and Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev's son], Ilham Aliyev, has told MPA
when commenting on Armenian President Robert Kocharyan's statement about
Baku's alleged readiness for unilateral concessions. Ilham Aliyev said that
concessions must be bilateral. He did not say what kind of compromises might
be made, citing unawareness of this issue. Ilham Aliyev also declined to
comment on the territorial swap option in the conflict settlement without
learning these proposals. However, he did not altogether rule out the
possibility of discussing this option together with the other options. Ilham
Aliyev said that Azerbaijan had repeatedly stated its readiness to grant
autonomous status to Nagornyy Karabakh. Azerbaijan is willing to discuss
different options, including the model of Tatarstan's autonomy.
Speaking about the possibility of Russia's activation in the settlement of
the Karabakh conflict, Ilham Aliyev said that Russia must act on the same
level as the other cochairmen of the [OSCE] Minsk Group. He said that recent
events had demonstrated Moscow's desire to play a more active role in the
process, and that Azerbaijan welcomed this. Touching upon the possibility of
Iran's involvement in the negotiations process, Ilham Aliyev said that the
negotiations were being held and should be held within the Minsk Group
format, but that constructive proposals by any country might be discussed
simultaneously. Commenting on opposition threats to hold protest actions if
a compromise peace was concluded, Ilham Aliyev said that such statements had
the political objective of satisfying their [opposition's] own interests.
Source: MPA news agency, Baku, in Russian 1150 gmt 13 Apr 01
Azeri opposition leader believes president renounced Karabakh in Key West
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 12, 2001
Text of report by Azerbaijani newspaper Zerkalo on 11 April entitled
"'Presidents are left to break the news on the achieved agreement to their
peoples" by M. Sirvanli
[Subhead] The USA and Russia will help them achieve their aims, Zardust
Alizada, cochairman of the Azerbaijani Social Democratic Party, says
The results of the Key West negotiations between the presidents of Armenia
and Azerbaijan remain obscure. Local journalists and politicians are still
lost in guesswork. However, the cochairman of the Azerbaijani Social
Democratic Party [ASDP], Zardust Alizada, told Zerkalo that this was an
attempt by the authorities to agree to the loss of Karabakh in exchange for
their own prosperity.
Agreement on the key principles of the settlement has been reached. As for
the agreement itself, a big group of experts has been appointed to draw it
up. The presidents will have to break the news on the achieved agreement to
their peoples. However, Heydar Aliyev will have not have a hard time, as he
has actually destroyed his people and any opposition mood in society.
As regards Kocharyan, he is not expected to have major difficulties either.
Russia, according to some reports, "approves" of such a settlement option.
This could simply strengthen its role in the region.
[Correspondent] Is a "breakthrough" possible in a rather radically disposed
society?
[Alizada] Who would then resist Aliyev? US President George W. Bush has
promised public support to Aliyev for the agreement to be signed. That is to
say, the Azerbaijani parties under Western control will be ordered: "Keep
quiet!", and that's it. As for the recent statement by the "pro-Musavat"
Democratic Congress about Heydar Aliyev's resignation, the train has passed.
The most they can do are loud statements and feeble protest actions which
will be dispersed by the police. Then, in order not to lose face, they will
say "we protested but they suppressed us". The Americans will "recommend" to
them not to aggravate the situation and everything will fall into place.
[Correspondent] But what did the presidents agree in Key West?
[Alizada] What has been achieved there is no doubt damaging to Azerbaijan.
It primarily concerns Baku's renunciation of Nagornyy Karabakh. It is
possible that a corridor for Naxcivan will be granted via Armenia's Megri
District. It is highly likely that the [Baku-Ceyhan] oil pipeline will pass
through this corridor. In such an event, the corridor will be under the
protection of international forces which will have a purely symbolic nature
for us since Armenia itself will be interested in having oil pumped through
its territory. So, this is rather cold comfort.
[Correspondent] However, the negotiations are under the aegis of Washington.
Why is there talk about Russia's growing role?
[Alizada] Moscow will not be the only one to gain from the future deal. The
Americans will get a whole range of financial and economic levers to
influence the situation in the region. But military and political control
will to a considerable degree be in Russia' hands.
[Correspondent] Politics and the economy are interrelated. Can there be a
situation in which the former is controlled by Russia and the latter by the
West?
[Alizada] Why not? This is absolutely possible. Each one will get "large
sums" from realized economic projects in the region and will tightly retain
the military levers of pressure on the situation in the region, hoping for a
stronger role in future. A project under preparation is a forced and a
temporary compromise by Moscow at the expense of Baku.
[Correspondent] The media tend to think that a "package" option for the
resolution of the conflict was mostly discussed in Key West. To what extent
do you think this option is viable?
[Alizada] Most likely Heydar Aliyev is left with only one way out - to
accept what is proposed.
Source: Zerkalo, Baku, in Russian 11 Apr 01 p3
US envoy rules out Armenian role in Baku-Ceyhan pipeline
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 14, 2001
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency Sarq
13 April, Sharg correspondent K. Mustafayeva: The US embassy yesterday
organized a direct dialogue between the US president's special
representative for Caspian energy problems, Elizabeth Jones, and journalists
from Azerbaijan, Georgia, Kazakhstan and Turkey. As expected, many questions
pertained to the transport of energy resources from the Caspian region.
Asked by a Sharg correspondent about the possibility of Armenia's
involvement in any form in the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan project, Ambassador Jones
said that the route for the pipeline was defined for the moment and that
Armenia's involvement in the project did not seem likely. She added that
this did not mean that Armenia would be excluded from regional projects.
This will probably be at the level of commercial contracts and decisions
about them will be taken by the companies engaged in this.
Jones presented some arguments against the Iranian route. First, she said,
the companies themselves selected the Turkish route because they wanted to
transport their oil to the Mediterranean, not to the Persian Gulf. Second,
it would take such a long time to study the Iranian option that this would
create an imbalance between the terms of oil production and its export.
Naturally, the USA opposes the Iranian route for political reasons as it
sees Iran as a country supporting international terrorism and not promoting
the peace process in the Middle East.
Ambassador Jones said that the new administration would not make radical
changes in its policy towards energy projects in the Caspian region. The
main thing is that these projects have proved their vitality. In Jones'
opinion, the Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan project, and then the
Aktau-Baku-Tbilisi-Ceyhan project, can in future become a stabilizing factor
for the entire region. In addition, the project is not an anti-Russian one,
Jones said, but an antimonopoly one which will allow energy export routes
from the region to be diversified.
Source: Sarq news agency, Baku, in Russian 1150 gmt 13 Apr 01
Azeri paper says presidents discussed territorial
swap option in Key West
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 12, 2001
The Azerbaijani paper Zerkalo says that Presidents Heydar Aliyev and Robert
Kocharyan discussed the option of a territorial swap during their recent
talks on Karabakh in Key West. According to this option, Armenia would get
Nagornyy Karabakh while Azerbaijan would receive a corridor leading through
southern Armenia to the Azerbaijani exclave of Naxcivan and the territory of
Armenia's Megri district surrounding it. The paper criticizes this option,
saying that it is unconstitutional and that its discussion is a sign of
Baku's weakness. Following are excerpts from a report by the Azerbaijani
newspaper Zerkalo on 12 April entitled "Swap of territories" by M. Sirvanli:
[Subhead] This option might get a hostile reception both in Azerbaijan and
Armenia
According to unconfirmed reports, the swap of territories was discussed in
the Key West talks on the settlement of the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict.
These reports (which, we repeat, have not been confirmed yet) say that the
subject of the talks between the two presidents was the possibility of
ceding Nagornyy Karabakh to Armenia. According to these reports, we would
receive in exchange a section of the historical Zangazur province. To be
more precise, the present territory of Armenia's Megri District.
[Passage omitted: The territorial swap plan first appeared in 1988, then was
suggested in an altered form by Paul Goble in 1992; the Azerbaijani and
Armenian presidents discussed the plan during their meeting on the border in
1999]
[Subhead] Is a new thing a forgotten old one?
This plan has now resurfaced. Heydar Aliyev himself gave ground for
speculation - he probably deliberately disclosed the essence of the talks.
He said in Key West that "we were very close to signing a peace agreement in
November 1999, however, the terrorist act in the Armenian parliament [in
October 1999] and Armenia's ensuing destructive stand spoiled everything".
Moreover, the [OSCE] Minsk Group cochairmen have repeatedly said that "the
talks are going on according to the agreements achieved in November 1999 and
during the presidents' meetings in February and March".
As we already said, the swap of territories was discussed at those meetings.
Circumstances that emerged have increased this probability. Reports about
agreements reached appeared immediately after Aliyev's and Kocharyan's
meetings with George Bush.
In the first stage the Armenians would withdraw from the six occupied
districts outside Nagornyy Karabakh; in exchange Azerbaijan would open all
communications for Armenia and Armenia does the same for Naxcivan. All
transport corridors would be controlled by international peacekeeping
forces. Then the implementation of the main points of the reached agreement
would begin.
At first glance it is not clear what kind of mechanism would guarantee the
implementation of this option. But a detailed consideration puts everything
into place.
It is difficult but possible to detect in the mediators' statements hints
that the territorial swap was discussed even if it was not the main option.
The OSCE Minsk Group's US cochairman Carey Cavanaugh said out of the blue
that "Iran is being periodically informed how the peace process is going".
It seems strange that a White House's representative would say this -
relations between Washington and Tehran do not need special comment and
Uncle Sam hardly has a desire to invite the Iranians to a region which the
USA has already declared a "zone of its strategic interests".
This could happen only in one case - if the topic discussed had anything to
do with Iran. The change of a neighbour on the border is certainly important
for Iran.
Those supporting this theory believe that Baku has begun a campaign to
promote the long-awaited peace. In any case, this peace has become the
target of strong attacks by the opposition and the public. Meanwhile the
authorities have started highlighting the positive points of the
hypothetical peace (liberation of the occupied districts, lifting of the
blockade of Naxcivan etc).
Such symptoms are visible in official statements. The head of the
presidential executive staff, Ramiz Mehdiyev, severely criticised all plans
for a peaceful settlement but did not mention the swap in his recent
interview with the official newspaper Azerbaycan. This plan was not
officially announced but at the same time nobody denied its existence...
[ellipses as given]
Moreover, progovernment political circles, the media and political
scientists close to the authorities are actively discussing the theory that
the changed package plan was discussed in Key West. This is also in keeping
within the authorities' tactics for cheating the public. The swap plan can
also be called a "changed package" plan.
[Passage omitted: Armenia does not like the swap option]
[Subhead] What will Azerbaijan get?
Let's put aside the thesis that raised refugees' hopes for return to their
native land. In any event the Armenians do not claim the six districts
surrounding Nagornyy Karabakh and have repeatedly said that these districts
are "occupied temporarily" and that they are "ready to withdraw from them as
soon as the problem is resolved".
However, proceeding from the logic of the supporters of the refugees' speedy
return to their homes at any price, it could be possible to agree to
Nagornyy Karabakh's independence.
However, if we examine the problem seriously the first thing that comes to
mind is that the authorities want a speedy solution to the problem in order
to get rid of the eternal geopolitical stalemate, i.e. remove dependence on
Moscow. If the conflict is resolved, Moscow would lose its main tool - the
military one - for exerting pressure on Baku and Yerevan.
[Subhead] To swap Karabakh for a corridor!
Summing up the aforementioned, we can suppose that in the end we will get
nothing except the semidesert Megri District with a territory of 500 sq km;
and probably not even the whole district but only its section around the
corridor to Naxcivan. Most likely we will not get it but "international
forces" which will guarantee the corridor's security. But we will pay a
heavy price for this.
[Subhead] What will we lose?
First of all, a tenth of our territory. This is the territory of the
Nagornyy Karabakh Autonomous Region with an area of 4,800 sq km. Then, Lacin
and former Shaumyanovskiy Districts. And finally Baskand, which is formally
considered an Armenian enclave on the territory of Azerbaijan (in Gadabay
District) but came under the Azerbaijani Army's control during the 1992
summer campaign.
For this alone it is worth anathematizing the man who dares put his
signature on such an agreement. The geopolitical situation sometime changes
without our will. But nobody will ever return to us the lands that we cede
today! And the force of arms will hardly help - a signature on an
internationally recognized agreement is much more important than military
victories...[ellipses as given]
It is clear that the problem of refugees will not be resolved in full. The
problem of the refugees from Susa, Lacin and 53 Azeri villages in Karabakh
will remain open. Of course, deserted Megri is better than a tent camp and
insults from compatriots, but is this is the best way out of the situation?
Did we do everything possible to have a better proposal than we have today?
The stand taken by Baku at the talks is the stand of a weak side which
agrees to everything provided that the problem is in the past and it is not
seen as capitulating completely.
However, by discussing this option Baku is actually giving up a cornerstone
which it has been keeping to for several years - the principle of
inviolability of borders enshrined in our constitution.
Source: Zerkalo, Baku, in Russian 12 Apr 01 pp1,2
Azeri ruling party spokesman says Karabakh
talks might consider corridors
Excerpt from report by Azerbaijani newspaper Zerkalo on 14 April
entitled "Baku can raise the question of a corridor to Naxcivan" by E.
Qarabalov
[Subhead] Ruling party executive secretary Ali Ahmadov has said
The head of the Azerbaijani delegation in the Key West talks,
President Heydar Aliyev, has not returned to Baku yet. Meanwhile, the
opposition is demanding transparency of the talks on the resolution of
the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. The opposition's Democratic Bloc
proposed to include a report on the Key West talks on the Milli Maclis
[parliament] agenda. The authorities are currently trying to conduct a
relatively more transparent policy in this respect. So will the public be
informed about the details of the talks? The executive secretary of the
ruling New Azerbaijan Party, Ali Ahmadov, answered this and some other
questions:
[Passage omitted: leaking the details could affect the talks; no
economic relations with Armenia until peace is concluded]
[Correspondent] The territorial swap with Armenia is being intensively
discussed. Do you think that this option is acceptable for Azerbaijan?
[Ahmadov] This option emerged during the Milli Maclis debate on ways
to settle the Armenian-Azerbaijani conflict. President Heydar Aliyev
voiced his view on this at the time. I think that the parties will not
spare the time to discuss this option.
Azerbaijan's stance is that the occupied section of Azerbaijan's
territories must be evacuated unconditionally. The country's territorial
integrity cannot be a subject of talks. However, the issue of a corridor
to link Nagornyy Karabakh with Armenia might be discussed in the talks.
Azerbaijan has a similar problem - we need a corridor to link Naxcivan
with the rest of the country. If Armenia raises the question of a
corridor to maintain its links with Nagornyy Karabakh, then Baku can
raise the issue of a corridor and a security zone between Naxcivan and
the rest of Azerbaijan. These questions might be considered in the talks.
[Passage omitted: OSCE Minsk Group cochairmen consult on all problems
related to Karabakh]
Zerkalo
in Russian
14 Apr 01
Azeri opposition leader says 'common state'
option would destabilize Azerbaijan
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency Turan
Baku, 13 April: "Heydar Aliyev and members of the OSCE Minsk Group
should know that there can be no talk of ceding an inch of Azerbaijani
territory to Armenia," Ali Karimov, leader of the "reformist" wing of the
People's Front of Azerbaijan Party [PFAP], said today.
He expressed concern at the revival of the "common state" option in
international circles and discussions of the possibility of Nagornyy
Karabakh's independence in return for a narrow corridor linking Naxcivan
with the rest of Azerbaijan. Such concessions would inevitably
"destabilize" the situation in Azerbaijan, he believes.
In Karimov's opinion, the opposition should stage a mass rally in the
run-up to the Geneva talks to say "no" to possible unilateral concessions
by the Azerbaijani side.
Turan
in Russian
1435 GMT 13 Apr 01
Azeri opposition round table calls for military solution of Karabakh problem
Text of Gunduz report by Azerbaijani newspaper 525 qazet entitled "We
want war"
The round table "The ways of settling the Karabakh conflict" was held
in the Ideal press club yesterday. The National Democratic Forces
Assembly organized the round table.
Talking about the impossibility of resolving the conflict peacefully,
the deputy chairman of the Karabakh Liberation Organization, Qalabay
Agalarov, said that talks will not resolve the problem. He said that
Azerbaijan must form a strong army. "We are not saying that there are no
diplomatic prospects. However, democracy should have a force behind it.
Without [military] power, the enemy will not take us seriously". Agalarov
said that a healthy economy should be created for the formation of a
strong army and, in order to achieve this, we must eliminate corruption
in the country.
He added that Azerbaijan will not be able to overcome its problems
unless the current authorities resign.
The chairman of the Lacin association, Eldar Maharramov, said that the
peace talks had no prospects. In his opinion, the problem can be resolved
only by war. "They have been talking about peace for eight years. We are
sick and tired of peace talks. While the cease-fire continues, the
refugees die and deaths exceed births. No-one is optimistic. That's why
we want to resolve the problem by war."
The head of NGOs coordination council, Ali Quliyev, said that the
Karabakh problem has always been on the agenda and that it is important
to show the show the united stance of the nation about the problem. He
said that the current authorities must resign as they are not able to
resolve the problem.
525 gazet
in Azeri
14 Apr 01
Azeri ecologists say Armenia to store radioactive
waste in Karabakh
Text of report by Azerbaijani newspaper 525 qazet on 13 April entitled
"Armenia buries radioactive waste in Karabakh"
The state committee for ecology and control over natural resources has
told Olaylar news agency that the Armenian nuclear power plant Metsamor
has been put into operation again. The nuclear power plant generates
10-15 tonnes of radioactive waste per year. Currently there is an
accumulated amount of waste and it is believed that Armenia will store it
in Karabakh. We should recall that radioactive waste destroys red blood
cells in the human body and causes leukemia. A source in the committee
says that it is necessary to address the International Atomic Energy
Agency: "Only international organizations can conduct research and take
appropriate measures on the occupied territories."
525 gazet
in Azeri
13 Apr 01
U.S. ADMINISTRATION SUGGESTS TO CUT U.S. ASSISTANCE TO ARMENIA BY 22 % AND
INCREASE AZERBAIJANS BY 46 %
Source:Turan News Agency
14.04.01--BAKU--The U.S. Administration applied to Congress with a
suggestion to reduce by 22 % the U.S. aid to be rendered to Armenia in
2002 and increase by 46 % that to be rendered to Azerbaijan. This was
announced by Radio Liberty. The radio station notes that its no secret
that the U.S. Administration is contriving to render assistance to
Azerbaijan despite the existing Section 907 to the Freedom Support Act, a
law which prohibits rendering direct governmental aid to Azerbaijan due to
the latters keeping in blockade Armenia and Nagorno Karabakh. Even if the
suggestion is accepted, Azerbaijan will be receiving $50 million of U.S.
aid next year, while Armenia - $70 million. But the Ay Dat (Armenian
Court) commission doesnt reckon that the Congress will approve the
presidential suggestion. The radio station reminds that previous U.S.
President Bill Clinton, too, suggested to cut the aid to Armenia by 27 %
but congressmen didnt support him. They didnt want to deal with Armenian
lobbying, Radio Liberty concludes.
By Staff Writers
AZERBAIJAN WONT ACCEPT PACKAGE VARIANT OF KARABAKH RESOLUTION
Source:ANS
13.04.01--BAKU--Vafa Guluzadeh, a politologist and former state advisor on
foreign affairs, reckons that the new proposals to be made by the OSCE
Minsk Group co-chairs will not repeat those made before. Even if they are
like before, the new proposals will be worth discussion, Mr Guluzadeh
said. Politologist Rasim Musabayov says Azerbaijan has once rejected the
package variant of resolution of the conflict which suited Armenia. Said
Mr Musabayov: Im sure that the new proposals will be based on the previous
ones. There is a principal moment: Azerbaijan has announced that and the
United States, too, supported the idea that Azerbaijans territorial
integrity couldnt be a subject of discussions. Another politologist and
ex-foreign minister of Azerbaijan, Tofig Zulfugarov said it didnt sound
real that the package variant will be given preference in the new
proposals. According to him, Armenias Foreign Minister Vardan Oskanian had
said two years ago that the package variant would take at least 8 years
for the conflict to be adjusted. Then refugees and internally displaced
persons will have to live in tents during those 8 years. But its
impossible, Mr Zulfugarov said. According to the politologist, Azerbaijan
wont accept the package variant.
By Lala Gafarli
SELF-PROCLAIMED REPUBLIC WORRIED WITH AZERI MILITARY EXERCISES
Source:ANS, Mediamax
12.04.01--YEREVAN--Azerbaijans warplanes conduct intelligence flights
along the border with Karabakh. This was announced the press service of
the so-called defense army of the self-proclaimed Nagorno Karabakh
Republic. The organization announced that Azerbaijans troops and aviation
stationed along the border with Karabakh have begun lately military
exercises. It was also announced that the breakaway regions defense army
had held similar exercises and informed the Azeri side on this account.
The separatist regimes defense army accused the state of Azerbaijan in
failing to warn them in advance due to the military exercises. The
spokesman for Azerbaijans Defense Ministry, Ramiz Melikov said this nation
didnt recognize a structure called defense army. The spokesman confirmed
the fact of holding pre-arranged military exercises, the goal of which was
check the fighting efficiency of the army. We conducted exercises on our
lands and they will continue in future as well, said Mr Melikov.
By Staff Writers
[ANS] News Digest, April 14, 2001
Reactions To Karabakh Peace Process
The Defense Ministry began military exercises by the Azerbaijan armed
forces on April 9. Vagif Dargakhli, a representative of the Defense
Ministry press-service, told RFE/RL' s Azerbaijan Service in an interview
that the military exercises were planned in advance and have no bearing on
the recent Karabakh negotiations in Key West. He rejected mass media
claims of mobilization and preparations for war. Dargakhli said the
military exercises will continue until April 15.
Observers do not, however, rule out a link between the Karabakh peace
process and the Azerbaijani military exercises. Politologist Rasim
Musabekov, recalling the military exercises by Armenian armed forces on
the border with Nakhchivan at the time of the Key-West talks, said the two
sets of maneuvers could be assessed as a toughing of their respective
positions by both sides.
In an interview with RFE/RL's Azerbaijani Service, Rustam Mamedov, who is
a representative of the Social-Political Department of the president's
office, characterized as "a bluff" the optimistic statements by the
Armenian side about the Key West talks. According to Mamedov, there was
strong pressure on the Armenian president during the Key West talks.
(Samira Gaziyeva)
[RFE/RL] Azerbaijan Report, March 13, 2001
Azeri Military Exercises Spark Anger in Karabakh
BAKU, Apr 13, 2001 -- (Agence France Presse) Azerbaijan's defense ministry
on Friday rejected accusations from leaders of the breakaway region of
Nagorno Karabakh that Baku was launching an intimidation campaign by
staging military exercises on its border.
Both Baku and the self-declared Republic of Nagorno Karabakh are
conducting military maneuvers this week, insisting that the exercises were
broadcast well in advance.
The maneuvers take place as Azerbaijani President Heydar Aliyev and his
Armenian counterpart, Robert Kocharian, just completed four days of talks
in the United States in an attempt to resolve the Karabakh conflict.
Karabakh's defense ministry on Thursday accused Baku of stepping up its
military activity and of conducting observation flights along the
territory's borders.
Uzeir Jafarov, head of the public relations department of Azerbaijan's
defense ministry, confirmed the reconnaissance flights, but denied that
Baku was in any way acting illegally.
"We do not need to report to any separatists about actions on our own
territory," Jafarov said. "We do not recognize the concept of 'armed
forces of Karabakh."
Nagorno Karabakh is an Armenian-majority enclave in southwestern
Azerbaijan.
The territory's local assembly voted in 1988 to be administered by
Yerevan, a move which sparked a full-scale war with the breakup of the
Soviet Union.
The Karabakh Armenians, with support from Yerevan, drove the Azeris from
the territory and a occupied large patch of land outside.
A ceasefire was signed in 1994, but the talks have dragged on ever since.
More than 30,000 people were killed from both sides and some one million
driven from their homes during the course of the dispute.
Copyright 2001 Agence France Presse
Azeri ex-officers unperturbed by Karabakh manoeuvres
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 11, 2001
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency Bilik Dunyasi
Baku, 11 April: "The command-staff exercises carried by the 'army' of the
self-styled 'Nagornyy Karabakh Republic' [NKR] should not worry the
Azerbaijani public," former Defence Minister Gen Dadas Rzayev believes. He
thinks that these exercises have a propagandist nature and pose no threat to
Azerbaijan. "To the Azerbaijani army, any exercises by the Armenians are of
no interest. Our army is conducting daily combat preparations and is ready
to rebuff any aggression from abroad," he said. Rzayev also pointed out that
he did not believe in the possibility of Armenia starting an aggression and
said: "In today's conditions, the Armenians would not dare resume
hostilities. This might damage the international image the Armenians have
created for themselves through mendacious propaganda and this will prove
once again that they are very far from peaceful co-existence. If they decide
on such a step, the Azerbaijani army will give them a appropriate response."
Col Isa Sadixov, chairman of the Union of Retired Officers, also thinks that
the command-staff exercises held in Karabakh are of a purely propaganda and
provocative nature. He recalled that public opinion in Azerbaijan was more
and more inclined to a military solution to the conflict. "This cannot but
worry the Armenians. They understand that the cease-fire regime is dragging
on and they will not be able to deceive the world community endlessly. The
conduct of exercises by the Armenian armed forces is a waste of time and it
is not worth paying serious attention to this. On the other hand, let the
Armenians get ready, but in any case, their efforts are pointless. Our army
will show what it is capable of," Sadixov said.
Source: Bilik Dunyasi, Baku, in Russian 1000 gmt 11 Apr 01
Azerbaijan's continuing 'crisis' over Karabakh
Commentary by Jaber Esma'ili from Tabriz: "The Republic of Azerbaijan and
the second Armenia"
The people of the Republic of Azerbaijan are going through momentous days
and moments. The President of Azerbaijan has decided to end the Karabakh
crisis in any way possible, even if on a temporary basis. The Karabakh
crisis is the Achilles heel of Heydar Aliyev's government. That is why he
is trying desperately to get rid of the shadow that the crisis casts over
his rule. When Aliyev became President, the mountainous Karabakh area and
other important sectors of the Republic of Azerbaijan, such as the cities
of Khojali, Fazuli [names as transliterated], Shusha, and so on had
come under invasion by Armenia. At that time, he managed to attract public
opinion by slogans of "preserving the territorial integrity and early
liberation of the occupied territories." Thus, he came to be known as a
liberating personality.
Now Aliyev is completing his second presidential term, yet, after the
passage of many years, he has failed to get back an inch of the occupied
territories. Moreover, he has given great concessions to foreign states
in the economic, political, and military sectors. Public opinion in the
Republic of Azerbaijan has now come to the conclusion that the government
of the ruling party has embarked on a course of deceiving public opinion
for the purpose of consolidating its power and continuing its rule, and
it has badly failed to address the greatest preoccupation of the Azeri
people, that is, the liberation of the occupied territories.
The recent elections of the Milli Majlis [national assembly] of the
Republic of Azerbaijan were considered to be fraudulent and a sham by all
the foreign observers, from the European to the Iranian observers, and by
the country's political parties. These elections were followed by
widespread riots. The nationwide riots and protests that were organized
by political parties and various groups, including the society of the
Karabakh disabled and war refugees, demonstrated that the Aliyev
government lacks a popular base and is on the decline. Moreover, in all
the protests and riots, the motivating role of [the concept of] the
"liberation of Karabakh" was quite evident. For this reason, the
Government of the Republic of Azerbaijan has once more resorted to the
Karabakh issue in order to preserve itself.
Heydar Aliyev considers the only way to settle the Karabakh crisis is
through talks and peace with Armenia. He has said that, in his meetings
with the leaders of 68 states in the past few years, they have all called
on Baku to let Yerevan go!
Following Aliyev's statements and the emphasis he laid on talks and
suing for peace as the only way to settle the Karabakh crisis, the
government press and mass media have devoted the greater part of their
articles and programs to the Karabakh issue, By various means, they are
intent on influencing the Republic of Azerbaijan's public opinion in
favor of accepting the peace that is sought by the government.
The new political move by the Azerbaijani Government, which is based
on its astonishing helplessness and flexibility, has led the aggressive
Armenia to insist on its former stances and not accept anything short of
the independence of Karabakh; in other words, the formation of a second
Armenian state. According to Heydar Aliyev, the "Minsk group" that is
dealing with the Karabakh crisis has suggested that Azerbaijan accept the
independence of Karabakh.
It is said that the principal reason for the reactive move adopted by
the rulers of Azerbaijan in shelving the Karabakh case and, at the same
time, making ignominious concessions is the nationwide spread of
anti-government movements, the dependency and profiteering of the ruling
group, and the illness of the President. The President, whose illness is
at a dangerous stage, has been grooming his son, Ilham Aliyev (the head
of the Azerbaijan National Oil Company), for a long time to succeed him.
To this end, the President cannot impose Ilham on his people without
settling the Karabakh crisis first.
Moreover, most of the opposition parities have taken an extensive
position against Heydar Aliyev, and have called for a war to be waged for
liberating the occupied territories. They say that one fifth of the
territories of the country are occupied by Armenia and throughout many
years of talks and futile negotiations, not even one inch of the occupied
territories has been liberated. According to them, if the government
agrees to the independence of Karabakh within the borders of Azerbaijan
in order to achieve peace, it would in fact mean founding a second
Armenian government inside Azerbaijan and the country would be officially
dismembered.
Although independent experts corroborate the stance of the
government's opposition parties, it should be understood that, before
Heydar Aliyev, the leaders of these same parties were ruling over the
Republic of Azerbaijan. They were the ones who surrendered one fifth of
the territories of this country to Armenia. The affairs of the country
during the rule of the present opposition parties were so chaotic and
disrupted that many instances of retreat from the battlefronts by the
Azeri military were caused by the treachery of the leaders of these same
parties and their cooperation with the enemy.
During the squabbles and power struggle between the ruling party
(that is to say, Azerbaijan Partiasy [as transliterated] -- the New
Azerbaijan Party) and the opposition parties such as Musavat Party, the
National Independence Party, the Popular Front and other parties, the
issue of the liberation of Karabakh and other occupied territories has
turned into a lever that is exploited by both sides for provoking
disputes among the people. In other words, the government seeks to change
public opinion in its favor by accepting an ignominious peace and thus
guaranteeing the continuation of the rule of the New Azerbaijan Party.
Many of the opposition parties, moreover, seek to exploit the
Karabakh crisis and by bringing to the public's attention the reality of
the peace that is sought by the government at this juncture, incite the
people to rise against the government and thus seize power. The
opposition parties know full well that with the existence of police
state, they have no capability to fight the ruling party and that the
toppling of the ruling party is dependent on the uprising of the people
and extensive popular protests. Therefore, the Karabakh issue is the main
factor for inciting the people to rebel against the government. This is
because the issue of liberating Karabakh and the occupied territories has
been the most crucial and vital issue for the people of Azerbaijan.
Furthermore, the people do not trust the opposition parties either.
This is because, as was mentioned earlier, the leaders of these parties,
during their rule, played the main role in surrendering the country's
important cities to the aggressors.
At present, the people of Azerbaijan know full well that the policy
of talks and peace advocated by the President of this country has brought
nothing in the past few years but step by step political retreat. Even if
this policy were to succeed, it would not have any results but an
ignominious and unfair peace and would pave the way for future wars.
Moreover, it is quite clear that the policy of "liberating the occupied
territories through war," which is being advocated by the opposition
parties, is a mere slogan aimed at competing with the ruling party and a
power struggle with that party.
The most essential issue in resolving the Karabakh crisis and
liberating the occupied territories of Azerbaijan is the existence of a
government that is independent of foreign willpower and reliant on the
people. The national will is that an independent government be formed
that would defend national interests and the territorial integrity of the
country. In the past few years, the people of Azerbaijan, in their vast
demonstrations and meetings against the government, have shown that they
have the required preparedness for bringing about a political
transformation. However, the foreign mass media and press that are
affiliated with America and Zionism constantly exacerbate the polluted
political atmosphere of this country with their extensive
psychological-propaganda operations. They are trying to keep people
undecided between two points (the ruling party and its opposition
parties). This is because the existence of an independent government that
would safeguard the national interests of Azerbaijan would be to the
detriment of America and Zionism. Therefore, the foreign mass media and
press that are affiliated to America, in their psychological-propaganda
operations, present the leaders of some of the parties, which are against
the ruling party and support America, in a positive light so that should
the ruling government topple and a new government form, once more the
supporters of America will take power. This is aimed at maintaining
American interests and plundering the national interests of Azerbaijan.
Despite all this, there are murmurings within the circles of Azeri
intellectual and independent politicians to the effect that the only way
to settle the Karabakh crisis and liberate the occupied territories is
political change and the formation of an independent government. The
start of a national movement in the Republic of Azerbaijan for the
purpose of political change, even if it fails to lead to the formation of
an independent government in the future, at least would face the
government with failure and threat against its existence. In consequence,
it would force it to align itself with the people and oppose the
formation of a second Armenia inside Azerbaijan.
(Tehran) Jomhuri-ye Eslami
in Persian
18 Mar 01 pp 13, 20
US chairman of Minsk Group says Iran to learn results
Article by the Tehran Times Political Desk from the "Politics"
column: "Results of Key West Negotiations Conveyed to Iran"
TEHRAN The American chairman of the Minsk group of the Organization for
Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), said that Iran is an important
country in the region and that Iran and other countries of the region
would be informed of the results of the negotiations between the Azeri and
Armenian presidents at Key West, Florida.
The negotiations between Heydar Aliyev and Robert Kocharian, which
aim to resolve the Karabakh dispute, were held from April 1 to 3 in Key
West, Florida. Heads of the Minsk group also attended.
The Baku-based periodical Yeni Mosavat quoted an informed source as
saying, "Iran was also informed of the results of the previous
negotiations and the subject was discussed in the meeting of senior
Iranian and Armenian officials in Athens."
The United States of America, France and Russia lead the Minsk
mediating group of the OSCE.
The Minsk group was established in 1992 with the participation of the
representatives of 11 countries in order to reach a solution for the
Karabakh dispute.
According to Baku media, the French chairman of the Minsk group has
recently been replaced. The new French chairman of the Minsk group was
once in charge of the France Embassy in Iran.
[Description of Source: Tehran Tehran Times (Internet Version-WWW) in
English -- conservative English-language daily published by the Islamic
Guidance and Communications Organization]
Tehran Times (Internet Version-WWW)
in English
Apr 10
Azeris wary of Iran's mediation in Karabakh
settlement - paper
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 11, 2001
Text of report by Azerbaijani newspaper 525 Qazet on 11 April entitled "Iran
wants to participate in Karabakh settlement process" by Arzu
[Subhead] Azerbaijan and Armenia should give their approval to this
Official Tehran may hold consultations with Azerbaijan and Armenia following
the Key West talks, the press secretary of the Iranian embassy in Baku,
Izzatullah Jalali, has told a 525 Qazet correspondent. During these
consultations Iranian representatives will discuss Tehran's participation in
the resolution of the Azerbaijani-Armenian conflict within the OSCE Minsk
Group. According to the Iranian diplomat, his country believes that as an
important country in the region it should take part in the Karabakh
settlement process. "Iran is ready to show its interest in the settlement of
this conflict, but the parties to the conflict should give their approval,"
Jalali added.
Iran's proposal to participate in the settlement of the Armenian-Azerbaijani
conflict has been discussed in society at the beginning of this year.
Armenia immediately gave a positive answer to this proposal from official
Tehran. However, Azerbaijan's approach to this was negative. President
Heydar Aliyev gave a negative answer to an Iranian journalist's question
about Iran's proposal. He recalled the occupation of Susa [Shushi] in 1992,
when Iran initiated talks between the sides, and stressed that he did not
believe that Iran's mediation would yield results now either.
Would Azerbaijan's position change if the consultations did take place?
Commenting on this diplomatic circles said that Azerbaijan recognized Iran
as an important country in the region and that our country did not downplay
the importance of consultations with Iran over conflicts in the region.
"This is the reason why Iran is being informed about the settlement of the
Karabakh conflict. However, this should not be construed as Azerbaijan's
wish to see Iran as a mediator in the Karabakh settlement process.
Azerbaijan still does not accept Iran's mediation." [the newspaper was
told].
Source: 525 Qazet, Baku, in Azeri 11 Apr 01 p5
Armenian Resistance Movement critical of current stage in Karabakh talks
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 10, 2001
Text of report by Armenian news agency Noyan Tapan
Yerevan, 10 April: Information about the Florida negotiations, albeit
scanty, allows us to conclude that the Armenian and Azerbaijani presidents
could finally reach an agreement on general principles, Musheg Lalayan,
political representative of the Armenian Resistance Movement, has told Noyan
Tapan.
He believes that the problem of the Megri communication and transport
corridor is still on the agenda, and "probably, this is the reason why
member-countries of the OSCE Minsk Group are trying to reach agreement on
this issue with Iran as well". Lalayan stressed that it had been said more
than once that providing this corridor and deploying international forces
there significantly damaged Armenia's national and state interests. In
addition, this is a serious blow to Iran as well - both from the view of its
national security and geopolicy.
As for Russia's current position on this problem, Lalayan does not rule out
that Russia "will surprise everyone" in the next few months: "I cannot say
what this will be, but I see Russia's behaviour as bit strange. I do not
think that the scenario implemented by the USA today will be definitely
acceptable to Russia."
The representative of the Armenian Resistance described the current
negotiations and the Megri option, which was allegedly discussed at them, as
a serious problem "which should be overcome". In his opinion, it is
important to look for new methods of resistance in the next months before
the Geneva meeting, and the authorities should be the first to do this. In
particular, it is necessary to find appropriate allies both inside and
outside the country.
"However, if indeed there are no other resistance methods, the leadership
itself should agree to a power change. But this should be done skillfully
and smoothly in order to protect the country from internal upheaval," Musheg
Lalayan said.
Source: Noyan Tapan news agency, Yerevan, in Russian 1350 gmt 10 Apr 01
Ex-Azeri state advisor says Azeri, Armenian heads
agreed on major principles
BBC Monitoring Service - United Kingdom; Apr 9, 2001
Text of report by Azerbaijani news agency Turan
Baku, 9 April: "Had the Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents not reached a
degree of agreement during the Paris meeting in March this year, the Key
West meeting would have not taken place," Vafa Quluzada, president of the
Caspian Research Foundation and former state advisor on foreign policy, has
told Turan.
To underline this, he quoted US Cochairman of the [OSCE] Minsk Group Carey
Cavanaugh, who had said on 7 April in Florida that the negotiations were "a
significant step forward which would have been impossible without the
serious determination of the Azerbaijani and Armenian presidents".
Judging by all this, today's meeting between [Azerbaijani President Heydar]
Aliyev and [Armenian President Robert] Kocharyan and George Bush in
Washington will dot the i's, after which the cochairmen will draw up the
final draft document which will be put on the negotiating table in Geneva,
Quluzada believes.
The expert is confident that during the Paris meeting, Aliyev and Kocharyan
agreed on major principles for the settlement of Karabakh problem and on
keeping them secret until the cochairmen prepare the final document.
Asked by Turan about what he though about possible concessions, the
political scientist said that the agreements "will not any cause excitement
in Armenia or in Azerbaijan".
"As far as I know, Washington has asked Moscow to ensure stability [in
Armenia] and provide security for Robert Kocharyan so that he can implement
the reached agreements. Should Russia fulfill its duties as a cochair, peace
will be restored in near future," Quluzada stressed.
Source: Turan news agency, Baku, in Russian 1030 gmt 09 Apr 01
News referred from Habarlar-L